Call to cut Luxury Car Tax on Australian-made vehicles

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

You are in no way subsidising that vehicle. They pay for it, then pay again with LCT.
Your thought pattern in regards a tradie in an FPV ute should also apply to surgeons and doctors - ie that you would not be treated by one that drives a Porsche. Ahem. So you look for the one driving a 1982 XE falcon right? I personally would avoid them like the plague as they are very likely poor at what they do, and their remuneration mirrors their abilities

Of course we are subsidising it when they claim it as an expense for the business.
you miss the point, a surgeon doesnt need a porsche to do his job, a tradey needs his vehicle though....what use is a ute that cant even be driven over a two inch gutter because its got 2 million dollar rims they dont want to damage or because its so low to the ground it gets its arrs stuck on the cross over on the driveway, or the thing gets bogged on anything but a bowling green. what other tools are they using that they bought just for the way they looked rather than how well they worked.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

You are in no way subsidising that vehicle. They pay for it, then pay again with LCT.
Your thought pattern in regards a tradie in an FPV ute should also apply to surgeons and doctors - ie that you would not be treated by one that drives a Porsche. Ahem. So you look for the one driving a 1982 XE falcon right? I personally would avoid them like the plague as they are very likely poor at what they do, and their remuneration mirrors their abilities

boom tish... lol....

[xtremerus]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Of course we are subsidising it when they claim it as an expense for the business.
you miss the point, a surgeon doesnt need a porsche to do his job, a tradey needs his vehicle though....what use is a ute that cant even be driven over a two inch gutter because its got 2 million dollar rims they dont want to damage or because its so low to the ground it gets its arrs stuck on the cross over on the driveway, or the thing gets bogged on anything but a bowling green. what other tools are they using that they bought just for the way they looked rather than how well they worked.

Just the same as our taxes subsidise education, I left school years ago, so no benefit for me paying for it now. My taxes still get used for it though.
I have never been on the dole, but my taxes are used to subsidise them.
I bet you get something that is some way subsidised by taxes, that I don't get any benefit from, but I don't care, and it doesn't worry me.
Taxes are for the general benefit of Australia, so you can't be picky and whinge about some-one getting a benefit that you don't get yourself.

Anyhow, most of the utes you are referring to would be under the LCT.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

Just the same as our taxes subsidise education, I left school years ago, so no benefit for me paying for it now.

I have no problem paying tax when it is used for essential things in society such as education, health etc, whether I need to use them or not.

But we are talking about subsidising someone's flash ute that is supposed to be the company ute for the plumbing business etc, with the v8, leather seats, million dollar wheels etc.......rorting, something completely different.

Originally Posted by xtremerus

Taxes are for the general benefit of Australia, so you can't be picky and whinge about some-one getting a benefit that you don't get yourself.

When the 'benefit' is an outright rort, then I think we can have a whinge.

Originally Posted by xtremerus

Anyhow, most of the utes you are referring to would be under the LCT.

That is true, doesnt change any of the points above though.

[pottery beige]

ffs we are well over taxed.. honk bloody honk ronald mcdonald govco are doin their best to bend and send you even more a la carbon tax style...as thegreat kerry packer said you're a bloody idiot if you dont attempt to reduce how much you give to these blood sucking snout troughed mf's.... power to the little guy getting one back with a set of shiny wheels or tyres on the work ute.....

[drew`SEVNT5]

Righto: Lets have a luxury tax on the following then:

- Watches (Who needs more than a $150 watch?)
- Airfares (Cattle Class is good enough for everyone)
- Alcohol (VB & Cask Wine for you, sunshine)
- Food (You don't need Eye Fillet, sausage meat will suffice)
- Clothes (If you shop at anywhere more expensive than Target or K-Mart, pay up)
- Boats (Anything over a hand-rowed tinny)
- Televisions (CRT's were perfectly fine)

You could apply the LCT model to a lot of things, the list is almost endless.... Doesn't mean they should...

Oh, and heres one to make Sudsy & Illavitr seeth with anger: I am buying a new car, to be used as my work car (I am a salesman) and to 'stuff' the government up, I am going to be buying a new or ex-demo which will be just under the LCT threshold(RRP well over it) and will be claiming 90% work use. Even worse, its a 2 seat sports car. So suck on that.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by drew`SEVNT5

Righto: Lets have a luxury tax on the following then:

- Watches (Who needs more than a $150 watch?)
- Airfares (Cattle Class is good enough for everyone)
- Alcohol (VB & Cask Wine for you, sunshine)
- Food (You don't need Eye Fillet, sausage meat will suffice)
- Clothes (If you shop at anywhere more expensive than Target or K-Mart, pay up)
- Boats (Anything over a hand-rowed tinny)
- Televisions (CRT's were perfectly fine)

You could apply the LCT model to a lot of things, the list is almost endless.... Doesn't mean they should....

I did offer some reasoning as to why we have a lct on cars and not other items earlier in the thread.

Originally Posted by drew`SEVNT5

I am going to be buying a new or ex-demo which will be just under the LCT threshold(RRP well over it)

As I understand it, you pay on the tax on the amount over the threshold, it isnt really a big deal if you have to pay the tax on only a couple of thousand that you may go over by.

Originally Posted by drew`SEVNT5

and to 'stuff' the government up,

I have no problem with legitimate claims, but when you say you are claiming 90% work use and are sticking it us up all, it would appear you are boasting your 90% figure is ficticious?

A problem in society, govco is a private corporation to be fleeced - do you understand where government gets the money from?,:by "stuffing" up the government you are not just annoying illivatar and myself, you are ripping off every other tax payer out there.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

But we are talking about subsidising someone's flash ute that is supposed to be the company ute for the plumbing business etc, with the v8, leather seats, million dollar wheels etc.......rorting, something completely different.

If someone can afford a HSV Maloo as their plumbers ute, then good on them from being good enough at their job to afford a car like that.

They are using it for work. You don't need to tell them they should have bought a $2000 Rodeo from the local used car lot, because that would of been good enough to transport their equipment around.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Of course we are subsidising it when they claim it as an expense for the business.
you miss the point, a surgeon doesnt need a porsche to do his job, a tradey needs his vehicle though....what use is a ute that cant even be driven over a two inch gutter because its got 2 million dollar rims they dont want to damage or because its so low to the ground it gets its arrs stuck on the cross over on the driveway, or the thing gets bogged on anything but a bowling green. what other tools are they using that they bought just for the way they looked rather than how well they worked.

Do you know what the word "subsidising" actually means? It means that you actually would be putting forward some money into the tradie buying the ute. You DO NOT put any money into paying for his ute. He is still paying for it out of his business expenses. He is just minimising the tax he has to pay by using it as a work vehicle. This is fully legal, and he is still contributing by paying all of the other taxes.
Lets put it this way. In my future doctors office I want my patients to feel special, so I put leather chairs in there with a large scenic fish tank because I am always running behind time (so many fat lazy employees wanting their sick certificate because they have a runny nose to see). Currently this is fine, and is deemed a legitimate business deduction and does not apply luxury tax on them. But then they see that they could get away with the tax on cars, so why not the fish tank? Surely that is a luxury too? And the chairs. So puts a huge tax on them too. Surely you would support that wouldn't you, because no doctor's office needs such nice chairs? They are just luxuries right? So I guess in your idieal world I will have bamboo mats for you to sit on while you read the government approved "Socialist times" waiting the approved 4 hours.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Do you know what the word "subsidising" actually means? It means that you actually would be putting forward some money into the tradie buying the ute. You DO NOT put any money into paying for his ute. He is still paying for it out of his business expenses. .

, if he pays less tax then he ought to by claiming it is a business expense, then that is taking away from the rest of the taxpayers, so yes, the rest of us are "subsidising' the leather seats, flash wheels etc.......fairly straightforward

Its not the same as a doctor outfitting their waiting room with nice stuff ......whatever extra crap is fitted to a plumber's ute is of no value to me while im waiting for them to finish the job, they dont need to drive customers around in them.........we are obviously living in // universes.

[GTP owner]

So the purpose of running a business is to pay as much tax as possible, because otherwise all the rest of society have to pay tax too, right? If someone else has to pay tax because a business makes a tax deduction, then you are subsidising the business in your logic. That is so very wrong.
I make all of the duductions I can, otherwise I am subsidising you employees. To not do this is crazy. I run my business to make money, create employment, provide a service, and have a lifestyle. I do not run it to pay as much tax as possible so that someone else can pay less.

By the way, most surgeons/medical specialists will claim their vehicles (including their porsche, bentley, audi R8 etc) as a tax deduction. You may not think they need it to do their work, but most work as contractors and have a home office. Travelling in between becomes a tax deductable expense. But according to you they should be in a festiva. Good luck having your gallbladder removed by Dr Patel - I believe he drove an old volvo....

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

So the purpose of running a business is to pay as much tax as possible, because otherwise all the rest of society have to pay tax too, right? If someone else has to pay tax because a business makes a tax deduction, then you are subsidising the business in your logic. That is so very wrong.
I make all of the duductions I can, otherwise I am subsidising you employees. To not do this is crazy. I run my business to make money, create employment, provide a service, and have a lifestyle. I do not run it to pay as much tax as possible so that someone else can pay less.

....

oh for goodness sake....if you are claiming things that are not being used by the business or are necessary for the business but you are misrepresenting the proportion that is used for private use then you are rorting.

Close investigation by the tax office would deem it illegal, it may be a common practice amongst those that have registered a business name, but it will never make it right.

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by sudszy

oh for goodness sake....if you are claiming things that are not being used by the business or are necessary for the business but you are misrepresenting the proportion that is used for private use then you are rorting.

Close investigation by the tax office would deem it illegal, it may be a common practice amongst those that have registered a business name, but it will never make it right.

oh for goodness sake.... youre starting to sound a little.....

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/w...-1226081090970

[xtremerus]

Originally Posted by sudszy

oh for goodness sake....if you are claiming things that are not being used by the business or are necessary for the business but you are misrepresenting the proportion that is used for private use then you are rorting.

Close investigation by the tax office would deem it illegal, it may be a common practice amongst those that have registered a business name, but it will never make it right.

Where has 'GTP owner' said things for you to make those libellous statements.You have no idea of his situation.

You do not have a clue that you are talking about.
Talk about strawmen.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by sudszy

oh for goodness sake....if you are claiming things that are not being used by the business or are necessary for the business but you are misrepresenting the proportion that is used for private use then you are rorting.

Close investigation by the tax office would deem it illegal, it may be a common practice amongst those that have registered a business name, but it will never make it right.

Nowhere did I suggest this. Once again you get it wrong. I said that it is legitimate and expected to fully deduct all legitinate expenses. Go and ask your employer how it works. Or do you work for Govco? In which case, stop wasting my taxes.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Do you know what the word "subsidising" actually means? It means that you actually would be putting forward some money into the tradie buying the ute. You DO NOT put any money into paying for his ute. He is still paying for it out of his business expenses. He is just minimising the tax he has to pay by using it as a work vehicle. This is fully legal, and he is still contributing by paying all of the other taxes.

Its quite clear from the above that you have no problem with someone writing off mega car expenses(minimising their tax bill) against a business whether they are justified or not.

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Nowhere did I suggest this. Once again you get it wrong. I said that it is legitimate and expected to fully deduct all legitinate expenses. Go and ask your employer how it works. Or do you work for Govco? In which case, stop wasting my taxes.

All that you are doing now is making a strawman and trying to weasel out of the fact that some businesses/individuals rort the system and it is the rest of us that is paying for them,(including those that buy fully kitted out utes and claim every cent of them as for the business) that was the point I was making, not how you do or dont make claims for your own personal business, nor did i claim you did, check my wording :

if you are claiming things that are not being used by the business or are necessary for the business but you are misrepresenting the proportion that is used for private use then you are rorting.

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by sudszy

As I understand it, you pay on the tax on the amount over the threshold, it isnt really a big deal if you have to pay the tax on only a couple of thousand that you may go over by.

I have no problem with legitimate claims, but when you say you are claiming 90% work use and are sticking it us up all, it would appear you are boasting your 90% figure is ficticious?

Yes, only on the bit over the 57k (or whatever it is) is subject to LCT... I'd still rather not pay it.

Ficticious? Nope. My logbook (& the rest of it) says 90%.

The 'stick it up' you thing is more the fact that Illavitr seems to have issues with people driving nice cars as work cars.... If I remember correctly, a Yaris is all I need. Well, you can shove your Yaris up your ****, to be frank. I pay enough PAYE tax to make it worth my whilst to minimize it where I can... And drive a 'nice car with leather seats' whilst I am at it..

[Ben73]

Some people in this thread are just jealous because they do not have a nice car they can claim on tax.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Its quite clear from the above that you have no problem with someone writing off mega car expenses(minimising their tax bill) against a business whether they are justified or not.

All that you are doing now is making a strawman and trying to weasel out of the fact that some businesses/individuals rort the system and it is the rest of us that is paying for them,(including those that buy fully kitted out utes and claim every cent of them as for the business) that was the point I was making, not how you do or dont make claims for your own personal business, nor did i claim you did, check my wording :

if you are claiming things that are not being used by the business or are necessary for the business but you are misrepresenting the proportion that is used for private use then you are rorting.

No i do not have a problem with someone writing off mega car expenses - it is their business and their choice to use it as a deduction, whether that is the leather lounge chairs in the waiting room or a very expensive car.

I had to look up what a stawman was . But it seems using examples are lost on you, so I will not use them to illustrate my points. Therefoire please ignore the lounge chair example mentioned previously.

As for the utes - it does not matter whether YOU deem them to be neccessary or unneccesary. We live in a supposedly free society that encourages capitalism. If they want the leather heated seats, why do you have a problem with that? What you fail to grasp is that just because he uses his business income to pay for a more expensive ute, he is NOT making you pay more tax, nor rorting the system. You don't subsidise him. He has to generate the income in the first place. Your same argument could be used that if he took a week off work, he is not paying tax on the lack of income generated - so you subsidised his holiday (because you now have to pay more tax) - oops there was another example.

And for a point we agree on, I do not encourage misprepresenting personal expenses as a business expense. Nowhere did I do this. My business is quite clean and able to be audited at any time. Saves the hassle and embarrassment of having to explain myself to govco.